This story contained an outrageous attack on the Cambodian garment
workers' demonstration over the minimum wage by a well-known Cambodian
blogger, academic and human rights activist Sopheap Chak.

I am used to hearing such arguments from employers as a way to escape
from their responsibility to pay workers a decent wage, but I did not
expect this from an experienced human rights activist.

Chak, program director for the Cambodian Center for Human Rights
(CCHR), claimed she has been watching the recent events closely, but
disparaged the garment workers' campaign for a US$160 a month minimum
wage.

“You have to come up with the data, come up with a reason why $160
now”, she said in an interview for the article which presented the
strike as not really being “about the struggle for living wages in the
garment factories” but the workers' “bodies put to service toward a
larger political agenda” of the opposition politician Sam Rainsy's “bid
for power”.

The opposition Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP) did join
demonstrations by the garment workers since the last week of December
but Sopheap ignored the previous two weeks of action by a massive labour
movement of garment workers to demand an improvement their wages and
living conditions.

According to Chak, the workers' movement did not provide enough
evidence to show that the garment workers cannot survive on the current
minimum wage.

But what kind of data do we need to prove that workers cannot survive
on the current wage? And who should be qualified to conduct the data
collection?

Five years ago, a living wage survey for Cambodia’s garment industry
conducted by Dr Kang Chandararoth from the Cambodia Institute of
Development Study (CIDS) concluded that the workers' minimum wage should
have been $90 to $120 per month.

The CIDS study “Living Wage Survey for Cambodia’s Garment Industry”
elaborated: “The current effective wage in the garment industry of US$79
per month, which includes overtime and other allowances, is not a
living wage. If we exclude overtime, which is currently being reduced by
factories at the moment because of the economic crisis, the average
effective wage is US$67 per month.

“Overtime has played a very important role in enabling workers to
cover their basic expenses and maintain a minimum living standard. This
practice means that the living standard of garment workers is highly
dependent on the economic situation.

“If the economy is in a good state, they get overtime, and their
living standards improve; if the economy is in a bad state, overtime is
reduced and the living standards of workers deteriorate even if they are
employed.

“This set up provides no security for a decent living standard, which
undermines industrial relations and the stability of the garment
industry. To make the environment conducive for both employers and
workers, there is an urgency to institutionalize the living wage, which
should not be dependent on overtime.

“According to our survey and calculations, the living wage of garment
workers should range from at least US$90 per month to US$120 per
month.”

That was what Chandararoth found was needed in 2009.

The recent minimum wage demand was also based on the findings of the
Labor Advisory Committee taskforce (a tripartite body including
government, unions and employers) to carry out on the research on a
decent minimum wage for workers which were released on December 16.

This taskforce, formed by the decision of the Ministry of Social
Affairs on August 7, made the case that wages should now be $157 to $177
per month to meet minimum survival needs.

So there is ample evidence of the poor living conditions of garment
workers, who mostly represent by women that their current minimum wage
is not sufficient to survive on.

Chak goes on to pose the question: Is it only garment workers who
deserve such a pay increase? Why not raise the pay for teachers (who are
also poorly paid in Cambodia) as well?

I could add to her questions. Why not also look at the pay of
military? Or that of medical doctors? Why is it NGOs worker earn much
more than civil servants? Should we debate who should get less based on
their educational background?

Should we demand that some people have their pay lowered because they
currently get paid more than garment workers and others? Of course,
that would be ridiculous.

Article 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: “We
should all be able to work and be free to choose which job we want to
do. We should be treated well by our bosses and get paid enough so that
we can look after our family. If we lose our job, the government should
help us until we can find another one. If a man and a woman do the same
type of work, they should each get the same pay.

“Everyone who works can join together, if they like to defend their interests.”

What we need to do is to support and join the struggle to improve all
people’s livelihood so they can live in dignity regardless of whether
they are garment workers, teachers, sex workers, the landless, farmers
and so on.

[Chrek Sophea is a Cambodian feminist, workers' rights activist and
former garment worker based in Phnom Penh. Her interview with Green Left Weekly about the violent repression against the garment workers strike can be read here and here.]